jumpin'jan
I wonder if the disc brakes from the 8.8 will bolt on the Mutt II housing?
Is the weight difference that much, the cost off narrowing would be the
same. I guess you would have to balance the cost of the rear ends [II should
be about free] against weight and possible disc brakes.. which have a
certain appeal ... then you would need a proportioning valve with the disc
brakes but you would probably need one anyway if the II drum brakes are
significantly different in size of shoe or cylinder.
Then there are probably a bunch of import disc brake rear ends that would
fit the bill and not be as heavy as the big Ford unit. Either way would have
to be quieter than my Alpine rear end which calls for ear plugs with the top
up or hard top on..jim
jumpin'jan wrote:
> Tom Hill wrote:
> >
> > http://www.currieenterprises.com/
>
> Thanks Tom for the link. Here is a link to a front suspension expert.
> http://members.nbci.com/barrettcc/
>
> The 8.8 Ford is pretty large to a 1725. The smaller Mustang II rear end,
> would be the one to get. It can handle a 289 engine and has larger drum
> brakes than the Alpine.
> Jan
> ______ ______ _______
> / ____/ / ____/ / ___ /
> / /___ / /___ / /__/ / _| _ _ . _ _ _
> /___ / /___ / / __ _/ (_|_(/_ /_)_|_(_|_| )_/_)
> ___/ / ____/ / / / \ \ _|
> ____/ /_____/ /_/ \_\http://mall.turnpike.net/~servaijm
|